The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

chiefhog44 wrote:sigh

collins is not the answer.......campbells playing ok right now......ya he needs to play better but his stats are not so bad.....dude just needs to sprinkle a few tds in there each week then his stats will start looking good.

i mean if dude threw two tds against gtards and rams his stat line would be looking very good right now..........i believe itl come.......collins is grasping at straws

Cambell has regressed, he should start sunday. He is our QB1, but if continues to not get the job done, then by all means make the switch.
Cambell has had ample time to get this offense going, Todd Collins is not our franchise QB, but with our defense Collins could get us in the end zone. Right now we are not competitive, thank god for the Lions. Lets hope Cambell rights the ship sunday, time is running out on him.

num1skinsfan wrote:Cambell has regressed, he should start sunday. He is our QB1, but if continues to not get the job done, then by all means make the switch.
Cambell has had ample time to get this offense going, Todd Collins is not our franchise QB, but with our defense Collins could get us in the end zone. Right now we are not competitive, thank god for the Lions. Lets hope Cambell rights the ship sunday, time is running out on him.

regressed? how so?

VetSkinsFan wrote:Todd hasn't proven anything since the Seattle fiasco. If he was so good, he would have taken the job away from JC, but he didn't.

There was no taking it away form him. The starter was Campbell's spot. Signed, sealed, and delivered.

IF JC is limited in his mobility due to the sore ankle should TC start?

No one on this website is going to make me think that JC is a good quarterback. He just doesn't have the track record. Say what you want about the constant change at offensive coordinators. If Miami can turn around in a season with CHAD PENNINGTON at the helm, who throws like a girl, why can't the Redskins do it?

The biggest problem I have with JC isn't his ability, its his lack of football smarts. He just doesn't have the awareness. He ranks right along with Derek Andersen in my book. Flashes of greatness but inconsistant from week to week.

Now I don't think Todd Collins is a long term answer by any means but I do think he can execute the offense better. Worried about him throwing the long ball? Same argument I heard with Mark Brunell. Until he bombed out 2 into the Dallas enzone to Santana Moss.

I will eat crow but if TC doesn't win the one game they put him in you guys can make me buy the beer.

Love the skins and I always hope for the best but they keep delivering the worst. Thankfully for me living up in Phili we beat Phili twice last year!

hail skins!

djlash wrote:IF JC is limited in his mobility due to the sore ankle should TC start? No one on this website is going to make me think that JC is a good quarterback. He just doesn't have the track record. Say what you want about the constant change at offensive coordinators. If Miami can turn around in a season with CHAD PENNINGTON at the helm, who throws like a girl, why can't the Redskins do it?

The biggest problem I have with JC isn't his ability, its his lack of football smarts. He just doesn't have the awareness. He ranks right along with Derek Andersen in my book. Flashes of greatness but inconsistant from week to week. Now I don't think Todd Collins is a long term answer by any means but I do think he can execute the offense better. Worried about him throwing the long ball? Same argument I heard with Mark Brunell. Until he bombed out 2 into the Dallas endzone to Santana Moss.

we keep hearing about how much better we would be with Collins does anyone really think that if the HC (Zorn) thought that Collins would give this team a better chance at success that he would have given him the opportunity by now - if this injury is an excuse to try Collins, then I am fine with that and even if Collins wins I am fine with Campbell as the QB as soon as he's ready and providing that Zorn thinks he gives the team the best chance at success and thereby giving Zorn and possibly Campbell a chance at being in the NFL next year.

WAKE UP people - why is it so hard to know that Zorn must realize that his job and possibly his future in the NFL is on the line here - I would hope he's playing the people that give the team the best chance at success

Love the skins and I always hope for the best but they keep delivering the worst. Thankfully for me living up in Phili we beat Phili twice last year!

we can still beat them twice this year too

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

Deadskins wrote:

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

That was just frustration talking. I would like to see the Indian Head Icon on the helmets go however. I would be the first to admit that America is the greatest country that was ever stolen, but do we really need a picture of them on our helmet?! The arrow icon is cool. At least it was used for killing

djlash wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

That was just frustration talking. I would like to see the Indian Head Icon on the helmets go however. I would be the first to admit that America is the greatest country that was ever stolen, but do we really need a picture of them on our helmet?! The arrow icon is cool. At least it was used for killing

This is a message board about a football team, and I for one am not interested in your regurgitated political indoctrination.

Californiaskin wrote:

chiefhog44 wrote:sigh

collins is not the answer.......campbells playing ok right now......ya he needs to play better but his stats are not so bad.....dude just needs to sprinkle a few tds in there each week then his stats will start looking good.

i mean if dude threw two tds against gtards and rams his stat line would be looking very good right now..........i believe itl come.......collins is grasping at straws

After three years, you'd think he'd have learned to "sprinkle" a little better.

I'm pro Todd Collins but until JC gets a fair shake in the redzone, I'll stand by him. Zorn buckles in the redzone so we have no true idea what Jason can do down there.

Im well aware of his inaccuracy with the deep ball. I feel that Collins could do a better job inbetween the 20's than JC with his awareness, quicker release and ball placement. But Jason is doing well enough between the 20's if Jason is allowed to throw the ball in the redzone more, he may be good enough.

old-timer wrote:

djlash wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

That was just frustration talking. I would like to see the Indian Head Icon on the helmets go however. I would be the first to admit that America is the greatest country that was ever stolen, but do we really need a picture of them on our helmet?! The arrow icon is cool. At least it was used for killing

This is a message board about a football team, and I for one am not interested in your regurgitated political indoctrination.

Sorry if I offended you Boss... and it was a comment about history not politics.

djlash wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

That was just frustration talking. I would like to see the Indian Head Icon on the helmets go however. I would be the first to admit that America is the greatest country that was ever stolen, but do we really need a picture of them on our helmet?! The arrow icon is cool. At least it was used for killing

Hmm, I wonder how we got the Indian head icon on the helmets. Oh yeah, I do know! It was suggested by the president of the American Indian National Council who wanted to show his Indian pride. You might want to know a little history about the team name and logo before you make such ignorant statements in the future.

djlash wrote:

old-timer wrote:

djlash wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

djlash wrote:Love the skins

I was wondering after your response in the Redstorms thread.

That was just frustration talking. I would like to see the Indian Head Icon on the helmets go however. I would be the first to admit that America is the greatest country that was ever stolen, but do we really need a picture of them on our helmet?! The arrow icon is cool. At least it was used for killing

This is a message board about a football team, and I for one am not interested in your regurgitated political indoctrination.

Sorry if I offended you Boss... and it was a comment about history

About which you know nothing.

Personally, I don't know why there has to be this major controversy about making a switch.

It's apparent that the Redskins were comfortable enough with Collins to go into the season with him as the only backup. So if your number one struggles, why not put in number 2 ... it's not rocket science, and it's not a sex change operation. If Collins works ... stay with him ... if he doesn't .. put Campbell back in there. It's not an irreversible decision. (Sitting Campbell might instill more urgency in him).

The sprained ankle gives them the perfect excuse, and the Lions are the perfect team for such an experiment. If Collins plays like he did in 2007, then a LOT of questions will be answered.

Right now, Campbell is doing reasonably well enough to not "necessitate" a change, but not well enough to convince anyone to give him a new contract.

Are the Redskins just that weak on offense that Campbell shouldn't be expected to succeed? Perhaps that's true, and perhaps not. No one knows the answer to that right now. The definitive answer would become evident if Collins lights up the scoreboard, and the Redskins would know for sure. Certainly, no one would dare call it just another coincidence if Collins were to perform considerably better.

Given the lack of production on offense (for an expended period of time going back to last year), making a temporary switch just doesn't seem to be the desperate act so many characterize it as.

I agree Ray - it's just that if Collins goes in (because Campbell is hampered by this injury) and wins this week but next week Campbell is ready to play and Zorn still thinks that Campbell gives the team the best chance to win then Campbell should be the starter - I just cannot imagine anyone wanting the HC to start someone at QB that he does not think gives the team the best chance to win - is that what you're saying?

this is really a no-win situation for Collins - IF he starts and wins then many here will say - "we would have played better with our best QB"

SkinsJock wrote:this is really a no-win situation for Collins - IF he starts and wins then many here will say - "we would have played better with our best QB"

Hmm... I think if Collins plays and wins the starting job, he would consider that a winning situation, despite what is said about the change on THN.

RayNAustin wrote:Personally, I don't know why there has to be this major controversy about making a switch

The irony. The only "controversy" is from those who want to make it. Those of us who don't want a switch know it's a stupid idea and a desperation move which isn't being discussed by anyone who makes the decisions or knows what they are talking about.

Ironically another stupid idea, changing the Redskins name, comes up in the same thread. A good rule to follow in life is not to be offended by that which is not intended to offend. The word Redskin can be a slur, it can mean the Delaware Indians who painted themselves Red for ceremonies and it can just mean Indian. Obviously Redskin fans aren't using it as an insult, so to take it that way is idiotic.

As for America being "stolen," again the same theme. Sure, we screwed the Indians in a lot of ways and failed to live up to our agreements, which is bad. But that Indians owned the land in a modern sense and ignoring how land was fought for and won across the rest of the world and only focusing on how it happened here over centuries, is again a narrow, valueless point.

Did anyone know how effective this offense is when JC is in shotgun and running the hurry up (which he call's his own plays)?

Just something I noticed.

Now Zorn's argument is that it takes out the play action but WHO CARES!!! So what if the play action doesn't work. I'm sure there are a million other plays that you can run out of the shotgun.

I think with a younger QB with less than 2 seasons of experience in one offense, this gives him time to view the field, audible to other plays if the play that is called isn't going to work vs. the defense that is being set up. I don't think this is the long term solution to run all plays like this but if it works and is effective, why not stick with it until it doesn't.

Didn't Gibbs run consecutive plays time after time until a team stopped the Skins in JG1 with Riggo? I may be wrong but I remember my Dad and Grampa watching the game when I was a kid and saying they are running the same plays and they can't stop us.

frankcal20 wrote:I may be wrong but I remember my Dad and Grampa watching the game when I was a kid and saying they are running the same plays and they can't stop us.

In the NFC Championship game in '82, they ran 50 gut exclusively at the end of the game. They even were telling Dallas the play call before the snap. It was glorious!

Jason may stay for as long as injuries or the number of loses allow it to continue.

Todd is here to hold the clipboard and run the odd play if Jason gaets banged up by a tackle. Nothing more.

I do not feel that Zorn has any confidence in Todd to become a true replacement to switch to in the middle of the season.

But I mean ... if this is THE scenario ... what does thant say about the wisdom of the Front Office and their development plan?

I said in a thread during the offseason something like this:

The approach taken by the FO is like jumping out of a plane with a parachutte called Jason Campbell but if it does not work ... you know what is bound to happen.

No Plan B.

RayNAustin wrote:Right now, Campbell is doing reasonably well enough to not "necessitate" a change, but not well enough to convince anyone to give him a new contract.

You make the exact point as to why they won't make a switch. The team is looking for a long term solution at QB, as they have been essentially since Thiesman broke his leg. At the end of this season, they will have to decide if they want to keep Campbell as the starter or otherwise acquire a new player to be the starter. Given Collins age, we already know he is not a long term solution. In order to find out if Campbell is the answer, he has to play. Playing Collins does nothing for the long term interests of the team. The only way Collins gets in a game is an injury or Campbell is playing absolutely terribly.

I'm holding out hope for a great year. But I do believe Shannahan would be usefull in rebuilding our OLine/Running game and getting the most out of Portis.

Redskin in Canada wrote:Jason may stay for as long as injuries or the number of loses allow it to continue.

Todd is here to hold the clipboard and run the odd play if Jason gaets banged up by a tackle. Nothing more.

I do not feel that Zorn has any confidence in Todd to become a true replacement to switch to in the middle of the season.

But I mean ... if this is THE scenario ... what does thant say about the wisdom of the Front Office and their development plan?

I said in a thread during the offseason something like this:

The approach taken by the FO is like jumping out of a plane with a parachutte called Jason Campbell but if it does not work ... you know what is bound to happen.

No Plan B.

I think the incompetence of the FO is pretty obvious at this point, and it's mostly because Dan Snyder had this lifelong dream to run the Washington Redskins. And why would he give it up? It's not like he has anything better to do. I'm sure he's a pretty smart guy, but he just is simply not qualified to pick NFL player personnel, and he's too egotistical to admit it. If Cerrato had any kind of real responsiblity for what was going on, he would have been fired years ago, ergo he does not have any real accountability for the mess the team is in personnel wise.

That said, I think your complaint that Snyder is driven by 'greed' is just silly. Every business owner has the obligation to run an organization for maximum profit, within the constraints of the law and some sort of parameters of human decency. I don't think you appreciate that.

With regard to Jason Campbell, I think he's being kept in mainly for reasons that have nothing to do with his actual ability. There's a lot of people in the Redskins organization whose egos and careers ride on the idea that we did not give away the store for a bust (again), and therefore the last thing they want is Collins to be given a shot to prove that is the case. Thus, even the media reporters will tell you flatly that there is not a chance in hell that anyone else will be given a chance to start, regardless of how poorly he plays. The conservative approach that Campbell exhibits on the field only reinforces this; you won't be benched for throws you don't attempt, for example, nor will you be benched for throwing 5 consecutive completions of 5 yard dumpoffs. Heck, some fans will even point out with pride what a GREAT COMPLETION PERCENTAGE you have and use it as evidence of what a great QB you can be!

He may or may not have succeeded under different circumstances (say, on a team with a FO that gets an o-line to protect him and better receivers to throw to), but on this team and at this time he is NOT succeeding. I think Collins proved that he could do better than Campbell with the same supporting players. Every game with Campbell shows why: Campbell is too slow with his reads and cannot throw an accurate deep ball. Collins because of his age, is obviously not a long term solution but based on his previous performance it's clear to me that he offers a better chance to win on any given week.

SkinsJock wrote:I agree Ray - it's just that if Collins goes in (because Campbell is hampered by this injury) and wins this week but next week Campbell is ready to play and Zorn still thinks that Campbell gives the team the best chance to win then Campbell should be the starter - I just cannot imagine anyone wanting the HC to start someone at QB that he does not think gives the team the best chance to win - is that what you're saying?

this is really a no-win situation for Collins - IF he starts and wins then many here will say - "we would have played better with our best QB"

I'm not concerned about Collins. He's already on the bench, and if he had to come off the bench, I'd rather see it happen against the Lions than the Eagles or Giants or Cowboys. And, if Collins came in and the offense performed definitively better, people can say what they want. They do anyway. Now, wether or not his performance was decidedly good enough to warrant him retaining the starting job for the next game would be a separate decision that Zorn is responsible for making.

Obviously, if the offense performed markedly better under Collins, the question of who gives the Redskins the best chance to win would be a much easier question to answer, and who to start the following week easier to justify. Right now, the assumption that Campbell gives us the best chance to win tells me that the Redskins have one of two problems 1) they do not have a QB on the roster that gives them any chance to succeed in the second half of the year 2) Zorn's offense or head coaching judgement is a complete bust, and we're doomed either way.

The way I look at it is this: What do we know? We know that the offense is struggling to score points, and can't score enough to expect to be competitive the rest of this year without some change. We also know that the offense is capable of scoring, as it did in the early part of 2008. So is the problem now the offense and the play calling? Or is it the execution?

Apparently, several think that the proper approach is to stick with what is NOT working and hope for the best, without trying another approach. I say that's crazy. You have to try something .. and since you can't replace the other 10 guys on offense .. and the coach and play caller is Zorn, that leaves the QB as the most logical first step in that process.

If you change the QB and the outcome remains the same, then you've at least eliminated that as the primary cause. But if you see a marked improvement in production, then you've identified the primary issue and know what you have to do.

What must be considered here is that this poor production on offense has been a long term issue, and hasn't just manifested recently. Those issues were present in 2007, before Zorn even arrived, and the offensive personnel and play calling/offensive system was called into question repeatedly then too. And with the exception of a hand full of games last year, it was a continuing problem for the majority of the season in 2008. The common denominator is Jason Campbell, since the offensive production dramatically increased when Collins came in in 2007. The improvement was immediate, and definitive, regardless of what explanation is given for that increase.... be it better play or better grasp of the offense. IT DOESN'T MATTER. What matters is the offense performed better. We do not have that same information to compare the two QBs in 2008. So whether or not a similar increase would or would not take place is PURE SPECULATION.

So I'm not saying that Collins would absolutely, positively play better. What I'm saying is that the only evidence available suggests that he did play better in 2007. And unless you TRY, no one will know for sure.

And, it's the only change that can be made in the near term. You can't replace the other 10 guys on offense, and it's highly unlikely that if the problem is poor play calling or a faulty offensive system, you're not likely to see a magical shift from poor judgement to good judgement in the coach.

Continuing that status quo approach will most likely result in another lost season, and the departure of both Campbell and Zorn at the end of the year.

Not only do I see a QB switch as critical to the Redskin's 2009 season, but a pivotal decision that will likely impact the future of Zorn and the franchise for the next couple of years too, given another complete overhaul of the coaching staff THAT WILL TAKE PLACE at the end of a failed 2009 season.

The only reason that there was not an open competition for the starting QB position at the beginning of 2008 is because the team still considered Jason Campbell as the long term future of the team. They brought Zorn in to coach Campbell and improve the offense. And I doubt Zorn had (or felt he had) the political capital to not give Campbell every opportunity to succeed. That is no longer the case given the attempts to replace Campbell in the offseason. And aside from racking up some decent stats against a very poor team last week, Campbell still demonstrates his fundamental flaws as a play maker. Zorn would be crazy to not take advantage of the opportunity to replace Campbell this week, under the guise of an injury, while getting the chance to see if Collins can step up and save Zorn's job.

Of course, the play calling last week ... coupled with the off season decision to strategically bench your best offensive player on 3rd downs would certainly support the possibility that Zorn really is crazy.